Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Rwanda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The conviction of Ndayizeye Patrick was quashed because the only evidence against him was uncorroborated testimony from co-accused and a witness with a personal grudge, with no physical evidence linking him to the drugs. The law requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, and in the absence of such proof, the accused must be acquitted.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed Munyakayanza’s genocide appeal, holding that a credible single witness may suffice and that minor inconsistencies did not defeat the testimony.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellants’ challenge, held the evidence proved joint participation in the killing, and changed the offense label to murder while keeping the prison term.
A Court of Appeal precedents collection summarizing criminal, civil, tax, and procedure rulings from July-August 2022, including sentencing, evidence, contracts, and appeal rules.
The accident suffered by MULINDAHABI Félix did not qualify as a workplace accident because he was not traveling between his regular residence and workplace on a work assignment paid for by the employer, nor was there evidence that the journey was employer-mandated. Therefore, liability rests with the vehicle insurer (SANLAM AG Plc), not the social security fund (RSSB).
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal established binding principles on the scope of appeals, intervention, finality of certain decisions, procedural requirements for auctions and employment termination, mitigation of criminal sentences, evidentiary standards for confessions and witness testimony, differentiation between drug possession and trafficking, and the requirements for valid land registration and contract annulment.
Source excerpt
Court of Appeal precedent compilation summarizing sentencing, appeals, evidence, and criminal-law holdings from multiple Rwanda appellate cases.
The Court of Appeal established binding principles on criminal responsibility and mental illness, the definition of contradictory judgments, the limits of procedural error as grounds for second appeal, the requirements for recusal, evidentiary standards for property division among unmarried cohabitants, the scope of mitigating circumstances in sentencing, the validity of confessions, the appellate court's power to reduce sentences, the corroboration requirement for child testimony, and the rule that doubt must benefit the accused.
Source excerpt
Court of Appeal digest of April 2023 precedents on criminal responsibility, contradictory judgments, recusal, sentencing mitigation, corroboration, cohabitation property division, and labour redundancy.
The Court of Appeal established that mitigating circumstances can justify reducing sentences below statutory minimums, clarified the distinction between murder and assault causing death, set evidentiary standards for group crime and infanticide, and confirmed the burden of proof in illicit enrichment. The court also affirmed the correction of clerical errors, the limited effect of late admissions of guilt, the need for corroboration of child testimony, and the retroactive application of interpretive ministerial orders.
Source excerpt
Explore more
